M. M. LAL, J. ( 1 ) THIS is an appeal against a judgment and order dated 28-4-1978 passed by Sri G. R. S. Tandon, the then 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut by which he has convicted the above named four appellants under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code and has sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life and R. I. for six months respectively there under. ( 2 ) CHANDRU and Ram Niwas appellants are real brothers. Nain Singh and Atar Singh appellants, and Braham Singh who has been acquitted by the learned Trial Court, were also brothers. ( 3 ) THE relations between -the parties were strained. The chak of Bali deceased was adjacent to Rajbahat and the road. The accused persons used to take Rajbaha Patriot in auction to graze the cattle. They also used to allow their cattle to enter into the field of Bali deceased and thereby cause damage to the crop standing in the field. Although Bali deceased used to protest but the same never yielded any result. About two years prior to this incident the accused persons had launched prosecution against Bali deceased and his brother Mahendra Singh informant. Bali deceased used to look after the defence of the said case. ( 4 ) ACCORDING to the case of the prosecution on 23-12-1976, at about 1 p. m. , when Bali deceased, along with his wife Smt. Chandtari, was in his field and Mahendra Singh informant was also nearby, all the aforesaid appellants carrying Lathis, along with Braham Singh armed with a Ballamt came there. At that time Chandru. appellant exhorted his companions to beat Bali, thereafter all the four appellants and Braham Singh attacked Bali with their weapons and caused injuries to him. Smt. Chandtari tried to save her husband but she too was beaten. Mahendra Singh informant, Charan Tyagi and Chhotan Lal rushed to the place of occurrence, where upon the assailants took to their heals. A piece of Lathi of Nain Singh appellant was left behind at the place of occurrence, which was recovered subsequently. Bali deceased was taken to the Hospital for his examination and medical treatment. However, Bali succumbed to his injuries on the same day, at about 7. A piece of Lathi of Nain Singh appellant was left behind at the place of occurrence, which was recovered subsequently. Bali deceased was taken to the Hospital for his examination and medical treatment. However, Bali succumbed to his injuries on the same day, at about 7. 45 p. m. , whereafter Mahendra Singh wrote a report of the incident and took the same to the P. s. Hastinapur in district Meerut, where he lodged it at 8 p. m. on the same day. In support of its case the prosecution examined nine witnesses. P. W. 1 Mahendra Singh is the informant. He has narrated the motive and the incident. P. W. 6 Smt. Chandtari is the injured, P. W. 4 Chhotan Lal is an eye witness. P. W. 3 Sheo Charan Tyagi was also an eye witness but he turned out to be hostile. P. W. 2 Vitpal Singh was clerk, constable at P. S. Hastinapur. He was examined to depose that on 23-12-1976 at 8 p. m. Mahendra Singh informant handed him over the written report of the incident, on which this case was registered. The piece of the aforesaid blood stained Lathi as also the sample of blood stained and unstained earth from the place of occurrence were taken in possession in the presence of P. W. 8 Rampal. The investigation of this case was conducted by P. W. 9 Banwari Lal. ( 5 ) P. W. 6 Dr. V. D. Goel, the then Medical Officer, Incharge P. H. C. , Hastinapur, had examined the two injured persons, i. e. Bali and Smt. Chandtari on 23-12-1976. He had found the following injuries on the person of Bali: 1. A contused swelling 5 cm x 4. 5 cm on left side of scalp 12 cm above left ear. 2. A lacerated wound 1. 5 cm x. 5 cm on left side of scalp, 5 cm above left ear. 3. Bleeding from left ear. 4. A contusion 6 cm x 2. 5 cm, on right shoulder, with an abrasion 1. 5 cm x 1 cm, red. 5. A contusion 4 cm x 1. 5 cm, vertical on middle of right arm outer side red. 6. As abraded contusion 6 cm x 1 cm vertical on lower part of right arm 6 cm below injury No. 5 red. 7. 5 cm, on right shoulder, with an abrasion 1. 5 cm x 1 cm, red. 5. A contusion 4 cm x 1. 5 cm, vertical on middle of right arm outer side red. 6. As abraded contusion 6 cm x 1 cm vertical on lower part of right arm 6 cm below injury No. 5 red. 7. A contused swelling 8 cm x 3 cm on dorsum of right forearm oblique, rend in lower part. 8. A contusion 4 cm x 2 cm oblique, red n front and outer part of upper portion left forearm. 9. A contusion 20 cm x 5, cm lying obliquily on upper and middle part of left side back, red. 10. A contusion 9 cm x 3 cm oblique red, on lower part of right side back. 11. A contusion 15 cm x 10 cm on lower and outer part of right buttock extending to upper part of back part of right thigh, diffused, red. 12. A contused swelling 17 cm x 9 cm on front of right thigh lower part. 13. An abrasion 2 cm x 1 cm on front of right knee. 14. A contused swelling 23 cm x 14 cm on outer and back portion of right leg upper part, red. 15. A stab would 2 cm x 1 cm x 1. 5 cm on inner side of left thigh middle part 19 cm above left knee, with clean cut edges. According to the doctor aforesaid injury No. 15, was caused by a sharp edged weapon and the remaining injuries were caused by a blunt weapon. All the injuries were found to be fresh. Smt. Chandtari was found to have sustained the following injuries: 1 16. A contused swelling 13 cm x 11cm on whole of back of left elbow, red . 2. A contused swelling 9 cm x 7 cm on dorsum of left hand, red. According to the doctor injuries of Smt. Chandtari were fresh and caused by blunt weapon. The post-mortem examination of the dead body of Bali was conducted by P. W. 7 Dr. Vinay Mortin, the then Medical Officer, P. L. Sharma Hospital, Meerut. He had found the following ante-mortem injuries on the dead body of Bali1. Lacerated wound 2. 5 cm x 1 cm x bone deep on left side of his scalp 7 cm above left ear. 2. Vinay Mortin, the then Medical Officer, P. L. Sharma Hospital, Meerut. He had found the following ante-mortem injuries on the dead body of Bali1. Lacerated wound 2. 5 cm x 1 cm x bone deep on left side of his scalp 7 cm above left ear. 2. Multiple contusion in an area 13 cm x 10 cm on right shoulder and upper arm. 3. Contusion 10 cm x 6 cm on lower part of right arm. 4. Multiple contusion on practically entire area on right thigh front and outer part. 5. Dislocation of the right knee. 6. Contusion 12 cm x 5 cm on right leg on the outer and middle part. 7. Contusion 1 cm on the left thigh front side. 8. Contusion 12 cm x 4 cm on the left back practically in the middle. On internal examination the doctor found the base of the scalp as also parietal and occipital bones having been fractured: According to the doctor the death of Bali had occurred due to haemorrhage and shock as a result of the aforesaid injuries. ( 6 ) THE accused persons in their -statements, recorded under Section 313 of Criminal Procedure Code, denied the case of the prosecution. Chandru appellant, however, admitted that Patri of Rajbaha near the field of Bali deceased was used to be taken in auction for the purposes of grazing in the name of Chandrakiran and that he was partner with the said Chandrakiran. ( 7 ) THE accused persons, however, did not examine any witness in defence. ( 8 ) THE learned Trial Court gave benefit of doubt to Braham Singh and acquitted him. He however believed the case set-up and the evidence produced by the prosecution against the appellants and has convicted and sentenced them as aforesaid. Aggrieved by the same the appellants have filed this appeal. ( 9 ) WE have heard the learned Counsel for the State, informant and the appellants and have perused the record carefully. ( 10 ) SMT. Chandtari P. W. 5 is the widow of Bali deceased. She has deposed that at about 1 p. m. on the date of the incident she along with her husband, was peeling sugarcane in their field when the appellants along with Braham Singh came there. ( 10 ) SMT. Chandtari P. W. 5 is the widow of Bali deceased. She has deposed that at about 1 p. m. on the date of the incident she along with her husband, was peeling sugarcane in their field when the appellants along with Braham Singh came there. She further deposed that immediately after arrival Chandru appellant said that Bali deceased was a great litigant and that he would be seen today and that thereupon all the four appellants with the Lathis and Braham Singh with spear attacked Bali and started beating him with the same. She also deposed that when she tried to rescue her husband she too was assaulted. P. W. 1 Mahendra Singh informant and P. W. 4 Chhotan Lal have also deposed accordingly. They have given consistent evidence and, there is no contradiction in their evidence with regard to any material detail of the incident. These witnesses are corroborated by the F. I. R. and the medical evidence. ( 11 ) LEARNED Counsel for the appellants, however, urged before us that there was delay in lodging the First Information Report. It may be observed that whereas this incident took place on 23-12-1976 at 1 p. m. the report of the incident was lodged at 8 p. m. , i. e. after an interval of seven hours, at P. S. Hastinapur situate at a distance of three miles. There can be no dispute regarding the fact that on account of severe head injury the condition of Bali was serious. This fact is home out from Ex. Kh 1 which was a letter sent by the doctor to P. S: Hastinapur on 23-12-76 at 4. 30 p. m. , in which it was stated that Bali had severe head injury and was in a serious condition. Therefore, if in order to save his brother, Mahendra Singh informant P. W. 1 remained at the hospital it was his natural conduct. Therefore, we are impressed with the version of P. W. 1 Mahendra Singh that it was only after the death of his brother that he wrote the report of the incident and lodged the same at the police station. The delay in lodging the First Information Report is well explained in this case. Therefore, we are impressed with the version of P. W. 1 Mahendra Singh that it was only after the death of his brother that he wrote the report of the incident and lodged the same at the police station. The delay in lodging the First Information Report is well explained in this case. ( 12 ) LEARNED Counsel for the appellants has also urged before us that Smt. Chandtari P. W. 5 was not present at the time of the incident and had not seen any occurrence. He has also submitted that had Smt. Chandtari been present at the place of occurrence she would have sustained very many injuries. We find no force in the said argument because her injury report Ex. K7 shows that Smt. Chandtari was medically examined at P. H. C. Hastinapur on 23-12-1976 at 3. 30 p. m. and the doctor had found the aforesaid two injuries on her person. The said injuries were fresh. One of the injuries was on a bony part where, ordinarily the injuries are not self inflicted. We are convinced that Smt. Chandtari was injured in the aforesaid incident and was, therefore, the best witness in this case. This incident had taken place in the broad day light when the assailants would, have been very well recognized. The appellants were known to Smt. Chandtari and there was no question of her committing any mistake regarding identification of the assailants. ( 13 ) LEARNED Counsel for the appellants has also urged before us that P. W. 1 Mahendra Singh, being the brother, P,w. 4 Chhotan Lal, being the uncle, were the interested witness and that because they were also inimical they should not have been believed. In our opinion the said argument has no merit because it is difficult to say that a relation witness would not name the real assailants but would falsely implicate other persons. Learned Counsel for the appellants has also tried to raise a controversy as to whether this incident had taken place in village Ganeshpur or village Bhandora. The judgment of the Trial Court does not show that any such controversy was raised there. Anyway, both the aforesaid villages are adjacent. Learned Counsel for the appellants has also tried to raise a controversy as to whether this incident had taken place in village Ganeshpur or village Bhandora. The judgment of the Trial Court does not show that any such controversy was raised there. Anyway, both the aforesaid villages are adjacent. In our view when the blood and blood stained piece of Lathi were found in the aforesaid Chak of Bali deceased and the incident took place there it would not help the defence if someone took the name of the village Ganeshpur and other the name of Bhandora. There is no manner of doubt that this incident took place in the field of Bali. .